Georges Franju’s Eyes Without a Face (1960) is one of those films that seems to have cultural impact and name recognition that outweighs how many people have actually seen it. Selected imagery from the film has found fame outside the classic film bubble, but reducing the film to that overlooks its worth as a fantastic, stylish genre mashup.

Generally speaking, it takes time for a movie to fully captivate. The web needs to be weaved so to speak. But somehow Eyes Without a Face pulls you right into the mystery from the first few minutes. That’s a difficult thing to achieve. But through shot composition and overall mood driven by the scattered score, a car trip that just feels a little off lures us in. From there the film builds into a crime-horror hybrid that recognises that both mystery and shocks are important to overall success. Doctor Génessier has a real Doctor Frankenstein vibe about him as he yearns for the ‘mad-scientist’ solution to his daughter’s mutilation in a car accident. That probably makes the film and the character of the doctor a touch more whimsical than it is. The film examines how actions that can be grounded in supposed love, can be violent, misogynist and inexcusable. Indeed protestations of love can be used to excuse heinous thoughts, words and deeds. There is great mystery in the way the face of Christiane (the doctor’s daughter) is kept from the camera. This culminates in a literal unmasking that perhaps does not have the Phantom of the Opera (1925) level impact it was aiming for. As for the horror side of things, well for starters the film features one of the greatest masks in film history. Talking Jason or Michael Myers level of simple, terrifying iconography, though perhaps with more thematic weight to it, when considered in light of the focus on patriarchal possession of the female body. The doctor is imposing blankness and uniformity onto his daughter’s body against her will. A body he also touches and manipulates throughout the film without seeking her consent.

Also on the horror front, the film features a sequence of grossness that I didn’t believe existed in film until at the least the 80s. A slow, considered scene of a face being surgically peeled off. This main surgery sequence is methodical, almost silent to emphasise the gravity of what they are doing as a scalpel deliberately runs underneath face skin. These people are literally peeling a face off! And here, unlike in a lot of films, the audience really feels the impact of that and is forced to consider it. A lot of the great style of the film goes to the horror. In another sequence, documentary style still ‘mug-shots’ are used to show the rejection and failing of Christiane’s face transplant. Again this melding of documentary into the horror film for added impact and authenticity feels way ahead of its time. It is also measured and services the themes of the film, rather than just using gross photos to shock the audience, as it is sometimes used for such as in Adam Green’s otherwise pretty excellent Digging up the Marrow (2014). The final shot of peace after the chaos is a horror staple and Eyes Without a Face closes with one that is meaningful and almost physical in the way it soothes jangled emotions wrought by the 90 minutes that precede it.

It is quite amazing the grossness Eyes Without a Face creates quite simply through the well-executed practical effects. A thin mask, good acting, camera placement, shot length and positioning of the characters, all combine to make the scene difficult to watch because of its penetrative ickiness. Part of what makes this scene work so harshly watching it in 2017 is that we as an audience are so used to CGI for something like this. So when practical effects are used so well, it feels almost extra real. There are also a lot more subtle ways that the film injects unease into the audience than face peeling. The shot composition throughout is creepy, even when showing something mundane. It’s often symmetrical, an over-curated vibe playing into the surgical overtones of the film. This also speaks to the control of the doctor over all the characters, as though the films aesthetic is similarly restrained by him. The score is a wonderful mixed bag. A lot of it recalls Bernard Herrmann’s work for Hitchcock – scattered, jarring and disconcerts the viewer into a state of trepidation. But there is also a distinct sense of Wizard of Oz (1939) at various moments, potentially using some of the same music.

Verdict: The way that this film combines the mystery and horror genres makes it a must see. There’s a complexity to the themes and technical brilliance here which is filtered through simple, yet totally effective, style and stark early cinema grossness. Pint of Kilkenny

One of the conscious choices I made at MIFF this year was not to discount repertory screenings. In the past I’ve been obsessed with only seeing new films. But I want to focus more on film fest ‘experiences’ and not just see films simply because they are new. Especially given how strong some of the repertory options at MIFF this year were. My older films fitted into two distinct streams. Firstly I’ll cover the two films I caught from Alexandra Heller-Nicholas’ Pioneering Women programming stream. Then the three I managed at the Astor’s all night ci-fi marathon.

Undoubtedly my best experience of the festival was the screening of The Big Steal (1990) on 35mm. Director Nadia Tass was in attendance, as were cast members Claudia Karvan and Damon Herriman. Ben Mendelsohn also sent a quite hilarious introduction tape for the screening. Which was the perfect way to kick off a screening of what is one of the very best Australian comedies ever made. It’s a sweet high school love story with crime and heist elements. It’s also very reflective of Australian society, in particular class differences and the migrant experience. An exceedingly young Mendo is one lead, the head of a charming crew of teenage boys, also including Herriman and the utterly hilarious Angelo D’Angelo. Karvan is the female lead and even at this early age she brought a real complexity and presence to her character. Steve Bisley is perfectly cast as the hilariously sleazy second hand car salesman you will heartily root against. It was so great to see this with a huge crowd who constantly erupted with laughter and were totally invested in the film. Particularly what must be cinema’s only Volvo vs Holden Monaro chase sequence. A classic Aussie comedy and a teen film to rival basically any others. This is a little tough to track down, but I know it’s streaming on Ozflix and perhaps a couple of other places too. See it. Longneck of Melbourne Bitter

The other film I caught as part of the Pioneering Women programming stream was Broken Highway (1993), a tough look at toxic Australian masculinity directed by Laurie McInnes. The plot involves a package, a dead mate and a trip to rural Australia. This was a dense watch, perhaps not well suited to the festival grind. There is a flatness to the action that feeds into the bleak vibe and an aimlessness to the plot that almost hints at a noir vibe. Though I do feel that the lack of attention on the storytelling front in the end plays against the film, obscuring the thematic goals a little. Focuses on this contest of masculinity. Men hurling accusations that the other is scared, as if to be scared is the worst thing possible. The film is shot in beautiful black and white widescreen while the dialogue is really well written, meaningful with a snap to it. There are some great performances. Claudia Karvan as a blunt and quick witted young women. Her range as a young actress was made readily apparent by the two films I saw her in at the fest. David Field is great as the villain of the piece, all lean physicality with his menacing, snarling performance. A film I appreciated, but was not totally enamoured with. Would certainly like to see it again. Schooner of Reschs

The first film I caught when arriving at the Astor for the all night sci-fi marathon was the mythical Nothing Lasts Forever (1984). This film features SNL alumni including Bill Murray and Dan Aykroyd as well as Zach Galligan, most famous for appearing in the Gremlins films. The sci-fi weirdness contained in the film was so far from what the studio thought they were getting for their money, it has barely been seen in the 30 odd years since it was made. The film takes place in a draconian future where entry into, and everyday life in, Manhattan is controlled by the Port Authority. The result is something totally unique, that whilst is far from a masterpiece, is the kind of film you can’t help but watch with a big smile on your face. It’s unsurprisingly funny in an elevated and absurdist way. There’s some funny, adorably shonky, futuristic imagery, such as NY skylines with a single animated dome. That example sort of encapsulates the charm on display here. Even when it descends into awkwardness or amateurishness (or both at the same time), you will always be having a good enough time to persist with it. Pint of Kilkenny

It’s pretty much a given that watching a film with a big, enthusiastic festival crowd will improve the experience. But it is quite possible that The Visitor (1979) was an exception to the rule. The film played far too comically. And certainly some of that is down to filmmaking craft and performances. Not all of it though, and it is hard not to get caught up in a rambunctious crowd erupting in laughter at what is unfolding on the screen. The film is wild in every facet. Visually it opens with dust clouds and hooded figures, the plot involves an evil kid and shitloads of bird attacks, whilst the cast includes the likes of John Huston, Lance Hendrickson, Glenn Ford and Sam Peckinpah(!). Especially early on the sci-fi weirdness really shines through, helped along by some creepy flourishes on the soundtrack. It’s a mix of tonally worthwhile and unintentionally hilarious, though as the film progresses the balance shifts more to the latter. The evil kid performance is deliciously hammy and John Huston battles very hard. In terms of genre it’s a definitely a very horror imbued sci-fi if that’s your thing. There are certainly parts of this to like. But it does get a little too unintentionally funny and there are just so so many bird attacks. I have no idea what was up with them. Oh and the last half hour is basically unwatchable. Schooner of Carlton Draught

Tetsuo the Iron Man (1989) is an infamous film that I had heard whispered about on podcasts and in general conversation. So after the above film I took a nap to steel myself for what was to come. I tweeted afterwards that 5:30am is as good a time as any to watch the film, but that I never needed to see it again. I’m not sure I agree with the second part now, a month or so removed from the experience. The film plays like a gruesome cyberpunk Frankenstein filtered through punk rock. Aesthetically there is a lot going on. The achievement on a small budget, editing and practical effects as Tetsuo gets less and less human and more and more machine is just incredible. It is incredibly gross, at least for the first half. After that he becomes so much of a machine that it is no longer as visceral or cringy body horror as the early parts. And there is a rape/murder scene in the middle that is difficult to describe and truly horrific to watch. But there is just something about the vibe of the film and the craft that went into it that makes this really worth a watch. The narrative is barely worth mentioning, totally avant-garde. Though even at 70 minutes, this feels a little overlong. Stubby of Reschs

I was lucky enough to dash to the Melbourne International Film Festival for a weekend trip this year. I thought I’d write a couple of festival diaries, with paragraph long reviews of everything I saw. First up it’s the new films I saw, with the repertory films to follow within the next week.

A delayed train trip meant that I was not able to kick off my festival with Abbas Kiarostomi’s 24 Frames (2016) as originally planned. Some frantic changing of tickets and running from the train saw me taking in The Idea of a Lake (2016) instead. The film takes place in two time periods. The contemporary one focuses on a pregnant Ines, while flashbacks of her reminisces of childhood holidays by a lake make up the other half of the film. For the most part the contemporary aspects of the film work well. In particular the building of two key relationships of Ines’s – with her mother and brother. Whilst those relationships are deepened by the flashbacks, the relatively aimless wistfulness of the holiday sequences does not add a lot overall. From a storytelling perspective, the two parts don’t particularly inform one another, though they do on a thematic level. In addition, on two occasions as the film is settling into a rhythm, the director incorporates fantastical elements, which totally jars you out of the tone of the film. And they are not persisted with, making their presence strange anomalies. There is too much going on here. Which is a shame because the simpler contemporary familial aspects and the performances are really worthwhile. Stubby of Reschs

There is a fair bit of buzz around Loving Vincent (2017). Understandable too when you consider it is the first ever oil painted animation, consisting of around 70,000 individual paintings made in the style of Van Gogh. And the visual gimmick is truly stunning, not just the novelty of how it looks, but the way it moves feels totally new too. The score from Clint Mansell is also excellent, showing range for the composer who is probably one of the most in demand in the world. But for all the incredible visuals and music, the film is kind of ruined by the storytelling. What initially seems like an interesting choice to set it a year after Van Gogh’s death, quickly just descends into the same old biopic bullshit, just told through flashbacks. And the film is attempting some weird pulp detective true crime mash-up that is a truly strange narrative to anchor these technical feats too. It’s not just that the story feels like a strange fit, it’s also that it is a rote and inconsequential feeling investigation. Also just how closely it hews to crime fiction conventions – there are re-enactments, deep discussion of motive and running down of leads. It just does not work in the world of this film. You will want to see some of Loving Vincent for the remarkable visuals. Unfortunately due to the storytelling choices, you will have most likely had enough after 20 minutes or so. Schooner of Carlton Draught

Usually I focus my festival selections on films that I will otherwise struggle to see or that won’t open for a long time. So TheLost City of Z (2016) seems a strange choice given it opens in a couple of weeks. But it appears to be opening in a quite limited run, and at least when I booked my tickets, was not playing in Canberra. In any case, this was my only film in the beautiful Forum Theatre, so I was happy I caught it. The film looks beautiful too, no doubt helped by the festival’s projection expertise. It was shot on location and on film, both novelties these days. And this approach feeds into a classical, adventure style vibe. The film is evocative in the way it presents men leaving their families for years on end to fight wars and advance themselves, whilst also questioning whether that was necessarily fair to their families or even just the best thing in general. The obvious issue with this genre of filmmaking is that it reflects a colonialist, white saviour worldview. To its credit the film tackles this quite explicitly, acknowledging the fear amongst some Brits that what is found on these expeditions could upend their place in history and even the meaning of their god. Though the nobility of our hero and his crew, and their missions, is never questioned. As for our hero, Charlie Hunnam has a great presence in the lead while the supports, led by Sienna Miller and Robert Pattinson, are all excellent. Though the film has very traditional tendencies in genre and theme, it does not hew close to the expected story beats. Which results in a slower and more considered tale of obsession than I was expecting. Beautiful, well acted, and highly recommended. Pint of Kilkenny

A trip to MIFF this year wasn’t even on my radar until Terrence Malick’s A Voyage of Time (2016) was announced. With the scarcity of imax locations in Australia (Melbourne may actually be the only one), I realised that this may well be my only chance to see my favourite director’s passion project on an extremely big screen. There is something a little overwhelming about the film. Not surprising given it aims to encapsulate everything from the birth of the universe onwards in only 45 minutes. Malick does a good job of somewhat grounding the film. Firstly through the voiceover addressed to “my child”, then by quickly getting to a vision of earth that is familiar to us and referring to it as “our home”. The voiceover (delivered by Brad Pitt in this cut of the film) functions as a reasonable anchor for the imagery when it is kept relatively straightforward. It does delve, less successfully, into some Malickian philosophising, but that is actually relatively rare. The visual craftsmanship is stellar. There is the incredible creativity of the universe-creating forces that we first glimpsed in The Tree of Life (2011). But there is also a lot of incredible sharp natural photography. And it is all delivered on a screen that was almost overwhelmingly large in the best way. I mentioned that this is the shorter cut (a 90 minute one also exists) and I can’t decide what I thought of the length. It does feel like it skips huge chunks of time (even huger than the concept inherently requires), but as taken as I was with the film, I had probably had enough by the time the end credits rolled. In the end, I loved this film. The visuals are quite simply beyond incredible and if you can catch it on an imax screen, I think it is a pretty essential film/festival going experience. Pint of Kilkenny

Expectations for Todd Haynes’ new film Wonderstruck (2017) are sky high. It is hard to keep hype to a minimum when your last film was Carol (2015), one of the greatest love stories ever put on film. This film is a real struggle though, a ho-hum tale of childhood and familial mystery that neither intrigues nor entertains. The film unfolds over two timeframes (1920s and 1960s I think), with mirroring storylines of a deaf child searching for their family. And much of it unfolds as tritely as that sounds. There are small things to like in both narrative streams. There is some playful interaction with silent film culture in the earlier one and the young lead Millicent Simmonds in that section gives the film’s best performance. Whilst there is a budding friendship in the later part that provides brief glimpses of the childhood joy the film was sorely lacking. The combination of the two timeframes also lays layer upon layer of mystery on top of one another in a way that is vaguely satisfying. Interestingly the film is based on a book by the same novelist who provided the source material for Hugo (2011). Like that film, there has been mention that this is a film for kids. I can’t really imagine kids getting much out of this one though. It is dry, feels long and has precious little of the kinds of brightness and excitement that Scorsese’s film managed to do a roaring trade in. Whilst it is hard to tell, I get the impression that the film did not play particularly well with the packed festival audience either. It felt like a flat reaction to what I found to be a pretty glib and uninspired ode to childhood. Schooner of Carlton Draught

I finished off my festival with Eliza Hittman’s excellent second feature Beach Rats (2017). Hittman is able to convey a number of really specific facets of the life of the main character Frankie. He lives in a part of Brooklyn that feels a world away from the trendy depictions we are used to. He is a discovering his sexuality. Hooking up with older men online. Navigating a relatively aimless late teen/early 20s existence of drink and whatever mild drugs him and his mates can get a hold of. His crew of mates, presumably the beach rats of the title, hang out at the beach and play handball all day. Technically the film is really creative. It is really nicely shot giving a sense of life at a ground level. There is a grain at warmth to the shooting too, not sure if it was shot on film, but there are hints of that. A lot of the storytelling and internal life of Frankie comes from the editing too. Especially in the way his sex scenes with men and women are contrasted. The film is perhaps slightly overlong. But as a unique coming of age and an individual film about sexuality, this is well worth a look. Pint of Kilkenny

April was a huge #52FilmsByWomen month for me, the biggest since I started doing that last year. And female directed films provide the best (Queen of Katwe, The Edge of Seventeen) and worst (Twilight, Gang of the Jotas) of the month. Outside of that there was a bunch of excellent genre releases that are heartily recommended.

Worth Watching

Maggie’s Plan (2015), Rebecca Miller – There is such a spark here from Greta Gerwig which is very refreshing if all you’ve seen her in lately is Noah Baumbach films. The film jumps straight into the plot, with her character wanting to become a single mum. The script excellently reflects a life of parenting and academia. Though there is a jarring leap forward where it becomes a different film. One I didn’t love for much of the second half. Best when it focuses in on Gerwig’s character, her struggles and interactions.

The Last Airbender (2010), M. Night Shyamalan – Found there was definitely more to like here than not. Dig the fantastical worldbuilding and vibe. It looks great for the most part. The performances are pretty decent overall and I particularly love Dev Patel here. He’s totally hamming it up. The fight scenes are logical and easy to follow, which is rare for a fantasy film. Look it’s clunky as all get out and thematically schmaltzy. But I had fun and am a little devastated the huge sequel setup never came to be.

Scream 2 (1997), Wes Craven – Opens with a brilliant super bloody and brutal sequence in a cinema. Even if the rest of the film never reaches those heights, this is still a Craven film well worth your time. It also has one of cinema’s most iconic final girls in Sydney. The acting is really solid, especially from Courtney Cox and Neve Campbell who conveys the trauma she’s going through really well. The script is funny and smart, managing to still create real tension despite the humour. Thankfully the meta engaging with the concept of a sequel stuff is nice and doesn’t grate. Great long sequences of characters being stalked and preyed upon.

Barbershop (2002), Tim Story – Loved this film. Essentially plotless for the first half hour, but the riffing and setting up the vibe of the neighbourhood and the place the barbershop has in it is great. A place of community and learning. Neatly shot with some cool use of close-ups. The performances are excellent. Cedric the Entertainer, so often annoying, gives such a fun and deep turn. And Eve should be in everything.

Green Lantern: First Flight (2009), Lauren Montgomery – Doesn’t fuck around. Has the ring within three minutes. Plays like an absurd cop film – Sinestro the crooked hardass and Hal the bewildered rookie. Pretty basic plot. But despite the general crappiness of the Green Lantern gimmick, the action is pretty solid. Though the end sequence is a bit of a mess.

Almost Adults (2016), Sarah Rotella – Starts a little rough, the script especially and the acting is a touch patchy. But after a little while it finds its groove and tone. Pretty funny in a well observed early-20s kind of way. Also good on the process of coming out and how hard that is, even if it goes ‘smooth’. Pretty fun this film. Really good comedy. Winning performance by Elise Bauman.

Witness (1985), Peter Weir – The Amish connection sounds daft on paper. But actually provides an interesting cultural clash, particularly in their lack of interest/desire to be involved in laws. Weir really directs the shit out of this in a visual sense. Has a great score too. Also this Harrison Ford may be the best Harrison Ford and the supports are all really excellent too. A cracking, simple crime film with some great texture overlaid from the Amish/cultural clash stuff. And whilst the love story is a little forced. It handles the ‘from two different worlds stuff well. A seriously great crime film.

The Edge of Seventeen (2016), Kelly Fremon Craig – This film reminded me how great teen films can be. The fun voiceover and charismatic performances from Hailee Steinfeld (who is simply amazing here) and Woody Harrelson help to give the film a charming teen vibe. Fuckin funny. Nails the awkwardness and doubt of being a teenager. This is really good. A fuckin great script. Very, very funny. Awesome soundtrack that complements the film without being forced. So damn watchable too. I loved it.

Deidra and Laney Rob a Train (2017), Sydney Freeland – A really fun mix. Two put upon female teens as the leads, surrounded by comedic parents, cops and teachers. Asleigh Murray and Rachel Crow are excellent as the train robbing sisters of the title. Playful turns, but ones that make their plight realistic. It’s a little light on plot and tension. But there is a unique and quirky, though not overdone style that makes this a great watch.

Barbershop 2 (2004), Kevin Rodney Sullivan – It starts with some of the best opening credits I’ve seen in a long time. Overall it perhaps lacks some of the spirit of the original, hamstrung by a too similar plot. And the humour is not as fresh, feeling a touch forced. But it also has its own charms. There are some looser, sillier bits of humour that land. Plus the characters are great and the relationships develop from the first film.

Queen of Katwe (2016), Mira Nair – The performances suck you in early. Oyewelo, N’Yongo and newcomer Madina Nalwanga are all excellent. As does the sense of place (Kampala Uganda). Film has all the sports film beats, but because it is an individual sport, they organically form a character study. Her self-doubt, her overconfidence. That up and down journey rings true. Also sketches out some nice gender, and especially class, issues. The film is happy to meander occasionally too. Not subservient to plot. I really dug this one.

Namour (2016), Heidi Saman – A touch unfocused, most of it feels like set-up. But in a kind of nice way. A sketch if you will. Portrait of an Arab-American family, and by extension that segment of society. A complex, somewhat untrustworthy character at the centre of things which maintains interest, even when there are some noticeable story holes.

Embrace (2016), Taryn Brumfitt – You can tell that Brumfitt is not a filmmaker by training. But she is fuckin inspirational which overcomes that. Quite confronting in its own way – laying bare how so many people think of themselves. She also speaks to a really great range of people. The film does a good job of giving those stories room to breathe too, not editorialising too much.

Bridget Jones Diary (2001), Sharon Maguire – A really sharply written and funny script. Almost a touch heightened or surreal. Zellweger is perfect. Fully formed character. Film makes some good points on the societal expectations placed on women. Thankfully this is a film that never forgets to be fun. Some of the romance elements are a touch undercooked. But the characters and performances (including a great Hugh Grant one) carry that.

Jason Bourne (2016) Paul Greengrass – Feel that I like this series less than most, but this film more than most. This has the clearest storytelling in a series that’s the perfect example of getting way overcomplicated. I’m a big Greengrass fan too. He is great at constructing these long, multifaceted chase sequences. A really nice piece of the characters arc brought to life, with the thematically resonant decisions he’s making. And Matt Damon is really good at drawing all that out.

The Scent of Green Papaya (1993), Tran Anh Hung – Delightfully shot with a smoothness to the visuals. Music plays a big part in the characters’ lives which is a point of difference. Quite gentle, at times cute storytelling. Sweet and true to life in its own way. Not all that much is the love story I was expecting. Notions of servitude and some very gentle touching on class issues more of a focus.

Not Worth Watching

In a Valley of Violence (2016), Ti West – I’m a fan of both modern westerns and the films of Ti West I’ve seen, so this was a big disappointment. Starts pedestrian and really never elevates beyond that. The dialogue is bad, feeling like people are speaking as they do in 2017, while the stakes feel too low. The performances are also weak with only John Travolta really revelling. Ethan Hawke is ok but his character is averagely defined. Hollow. Feels like kids mucking around on some abandoned Western sets.

Ratchet & Clank (2016), Jericca Cleland & Kevin Munroe – Maybe slightly less annoying than anticipated, but still pretty annoying. Looks ugly. Like a PlayStation game funnily enough. Quite charmless and there is nothing to the sci-fi elements aside from parroting much better sources. The characters grate badly too.

Money Monster (2016), Jodie Foster – A disappointment. Clooney playing a bro-ey, no-substance host of a money show is a great fit. And there is some really nice patter with Julia Roberts. But the hostage situation on live TV thing feels a little contrived. And the ‘99%’ themes play tired. It’s not a total write-off. Jack O’Connell is really good, as he seems to be in everything. And when it trends a little absurd it works better. But the characters don’t stack up and the messaging becomes a little silly.

I Spy (2002), Betty Thomas – There is decent chemistry between Eddy Murphy and Owen Wilson here, though neither of them are stretching themselves whatsoever. But the vibe of the whole thing is a little cheap and shoddy. Also goes some off-colour places with some jokes about mental illness, sexual assault etc. More dumb than mean spirited I guess.

Red Riding Hood (2011), Catherine Hardwicke – Woah this is bad. Cheaparse lookin medieval sets. A weird sheen to everything. Gary Oldman delivers a mess of a performance. Truly craptastic allusions to whether torture is moral etc. Seyfried naturally has some spark and presence to her. But all that does is make everyone else look even more shit in comparison. The incorporation of the fairy tale it is named after is tame and adds nothing. There’s something that stops it from being totally awful. But not by much.

Twilight (2008), Catherine Hardwicke – As clunky as filmmaking gets. Voiceover exposition and Instagram teen emotion bullshit. Shoddily done. Ugly editing and shooting, plus a poor script. A couple of performances (Stewart and Kendrick) rise to the heights of being ok. But Robert Pattinson who is generally very good, plays this role terribly. The execution of the vampires and the level of connection in the main romance is utterly stupid. Really really bad.

Gang of the Jotas (2012), Marjane Satrapi – Very low budget. Stilted to the point of being amateurish. Aiming for this madcap, fish outta water escalation vibe. With the mafia involved of course. But it’s just silly. Lacking setup or story or something. Script is horrid. Notion that these guys would go to any trouble to help this woman, is silly as presented by the script. An unwieldly attempt to combining serious drama and caper shenanigans.

GLOW (2017) hit Netflix a few weeks ago so the gushing about how great it is has passed us by. But this hard-working (sort of) Dad only just finished and feels the need to chime in with some love for it.

GLOW focusses on Alison Brie’s down on her luck actor Ruth as she tries to make it in 1980s LA and ends up joining an upstart all female wrestling troupe. That’s what the show focusses on initially in any case. As the series progresses, more and more of the supporting cast (almost all women) are folded to the forefront of various storylines. Particularly Debbie, the star of the show and Ruth’s former best friend, played excellently by Betty Gilpin. I fell in love with this show basically from the garish neon credits onwards. The show slaps on a proud feminist badge early on which certainly didn’t hurt the appeal. The storytelling is a little slow to get going. But from episode five or so onwards, I was totally hooked. This point also coincides with where GLOW makes its unabashed, innocent love of professional wrestling very clear as Brie starts playing a staple Russian heel. The show explores how wrestling is a very simple, pure form of stripped-down storytelling, in both good and bad ways. The preparation of the show within a show breaks down the questions and process of a storytelling approach that is focussed on “stereotypes not backstory”.

As much as the show is an ensemble, there is no doubting that Alison Brie is the star here. My main familiarity with Brie is from her excellent work in Community (2009-2015), but she is showing a lot of range here. Her performance is winning and hilarious, whilst the writing of the character makes her feel real and deeply flawed. There’s a weight to what she is doing here without it ever feeling overwrought or heavy handed. One criticism of the show that I have heard is that too much emphasis is placed on Marc Maron’s character Sam and his issues. It’s a fair comment and that focus does take away somewhat from some of the awesome wrestling women. But it also provides variety to the storytelling as the women go about their training. In future seasons, when the show within the show is up and running, perhaps it won’t be necessary to have such a heavy focus on Sam.

The entire cast of female wrestlers are brilliant. Both in the writing and performance. Special mention of real-life pro-wrestler Awesome Kong who plays Tamme aka Welfare Queen in the show. In her wrestling days, Awesome Kong was a genuine game-changer in terms of what a women’s wrestler looked like and could do in the ring. Given in this season she shows that she can hold her own on the performance front, I’m hoping she’ll be at the centre of plenty of season 2 as there is (presumably) more and more wrestling action. It is so great to see such a wide variety of female bodies and characters onscreen and performing in an athletic manner. Thematically the show picks up on this late in the season with a focus on the connection between wrestling and the ownership of women’s bodies. The athleticism of wrestling is all their own, no matter their background or current situation.

Verdict: Once it gets going mid-season, GLOW is an unstoppable combination of things that don’t usually go together – a sincere & serious affection for the world of pro-wrestling, stunning performances, consistently funny writing, a huge range of excellent female characters and extended showbiz making-of plotting. It also leaves us just as the show is going into production, meaning there are almost limitless places that the show can take us in season 2 and beyond. There’s an exultant quality to the show that I definitely want more of. Longneck of Melbourne Bitter

I feel a little daft posting these so late. But really they don’t lose much by me doing so. All of these films are still out there somewhere for you to see. March was generally pretty positive, with some good to great new releases and some excellent Middle Eastern #52FilmsByWomen entries being the pick of things. I feel a little daft posting these so late. But really they don’t lose much by me doing so. All of these films are still out there somewhere for you to see. March was generally pretty positive, with some good to great new releases and some excellent Middle Eastern #52FilmsByWomen entries being the pick of things.

Worth Watching

Kong: Skull Island (2017), Jordan Vogt-Roberts – Very Big, very dumb and quite fun. The cast goes a long way toward that with Brie Larson, Tom Hiddleston and Thomas Mann all nailing it. John C. Reilly is decent too, saving a character that could have been abysmal. The film looks really good, though I could probably have done with more Kong and less of all the other monsters. In terms of plot, it’s stock standard, though I thought the attempts to make it a Vietnam War film were pretty tame. Overall mildly distracting, no more, no less.

The Gunfighter (1950), Henry King – The direction, and gravitas-laden performance from Gregory Peck, immediately set up a mythology around the character of Jimmy Ringo. It’s a classic, focussed western tale with great interplay between the characters. Has a lot of those classic western themes going on, especially the struggle between family and the gun. Also when to ‘hang it up’. Though there is a disappointing sense of inevitability to how it all finishes up.

Keanu (2016), Peter Atencio – Haven’t seen too much of Key & Peele but I loved this. One of the better film comedies of recent years. There’s a cool odd-couple vibe to their characters and both grow really nicely through the film. The film is always engaged with race, but the laughs come from a wide variety of sources. Funny as shit and insightful.

Mustang (2015), Deniz Gamze Ergüven – A brilliant film. An excellently established portrait of overriding moral conservatism at a societal level, contrasted with the individual spark of the girls. The film flows really nicely. Not plot heavy but still engaging and has stakes. Very good at expressing heightened moments of joy against a torrid backdrop. Technically the cinematography is bright and really reflects each scene whilst the nice brooding score adds weight throughout.

Somewhere in Time (1980), Jeannot Szwarc – Starts with an awesomely creepy moment – an old woman comes up to Christopher Reeve and implores him to “come back to me”. Reeves is exceedingly charismatic. He fills the screen and physically embodies his character. His performance really carries the film and what could have been an awkward tone. This works really well as a magical realist love story. The time travel elements are explained in-depth but never weighed down with rules. And there’s a great tension to how these elements will resolve themselves.

Family Plot (1976), Alfred Hitchcock – Late Hitch with a really great ensemble cast. A very different vibe from the director. Crime-comedy in genre terms with hints of farce. There’s a car chase sequence here that’s madcap in a way very unlike anything else the director has ever done. But at the same time very tense. I love how the film and plot just unfold and it’s here that the director’s trademark control really shines. Barbara Harris and a very young Bruce Dern stand out performance wise. It also has a really nice John Williams score that merges nicely with the director’s approach.

Kung-fu Master! (1988), Agnes Varda – A really interesting thematic exploration of motherhood, with a main character who is a ‘bad mum’. For complex reasons sure, but the interrogation of her heart-wrenchingly poor decisions gives the main drive of the film. She undertakes an affair with a young teenager, the same age as her daughter (played by Charlotte Gainsbourg, a remarkable performer even at this age). Deeply disconcerting, the way she treats him as both a little boy and lover.

Moonlight (2016), Barry Jenkins – Quite simply: as brilliant as advertised. The script is masterful. Each act uniquely bringing the character to life at a different age. The acting is excellent with the three Chirons all succeeding in bringing what the script is doing to life. There’s something quite masterful in the way Jenkins gets the three sections to interlock and inform one another. Flow of the characters throughout is special. Feels as though it is some form of American classic. Uniquely situated as a film about African American homosexuality.

Logan (2017), James Mangold – A hell of a film. Focused. You can feel it – my jaw dropped, my fists clenched. Deeper emotional complexity to the main character than any comic book film ever. This is the first realistically vulnerable superhero we’ve seen on screen. Three incredible performances – Jackman, Stewart and newcomer Dafne Keen. Feels both small and meaningful. Refreshing contrast to the MCU with a self-contained story and uniquely sparse worldbuilding. Great, extra bloody, action. And villains that actually fit the aesthetic of the film. Really excellent score too.

Mascarades (2008), Lyès Salem – Algerian film with a great sense of life from the get-go. Liked it a lot. A couple of great female characters. But also some very silly slapstick that comes out of nowhere. Tonally flicks a switch half an hour in. Thematically about pride and saving face within your community. The thrill of being accepted even if you know it’s a shallow acceptance. Also the hilarious heightened consequences of a lie that spirals out of control.

Wadjda (2012), Haifaa Al-Mansour – Beautifully simple world and character building. Builds this very clear patriarchy, anchored in casual misogyny all round. Such a great, cheeky outlook on life from the main teen girl character. Interesting to consider the parts of this that are universal, and those that are quite Saudi specific. Profile of a young hustler, a schemer. An unfeeling, teen edge to her at times. I adore this film. Especially the second half which is a ripsnorter. A character study of a character I adore.

Captain Abu Raed (2008), Amin Matalqa – Really nicely composed, both in terms of story and visuals. A character that you really like too. Elderly cleaner becomes a cult hero with the local kids when he convinces them he’s an airline pilot and recounts tales of adventure. Charming, but goes some dark places toward the end. But these two opposites nest together well. Love the unlikely friendship between Noor and Abu Raed. Resolves the different story threads really well with a quite emotional ending.

Son of Babylon (2009), Mohamed Al Daradji – Takes place in Iraq just after the fall of Saddam. Incredibly desolate, sparse expanses of earth. Conveys very well the early days of the occupation and what that would have felt like. In essence it’s an Iraqi road movie. Captures nicely, without forcing, the ethnic factions and sectarianism of Iraq.

Paradise Now (2005), Hany Abu-Assad – Two amiable but aimless friends are willing (?) suicide bombers. Really well performed, especially from the two main dudes. An interesting love interest and the occasional nice aside about cinema. The simplicity in the portrayal of prepping for the bombing makes it quite stark. Harrowing. Examines notions of normality and if it’s even possible for that to exist in Palestine. Weaves the emotional, spiritual and political into the plot level of things really well.

Not Worth Watching

The Long Riders (1980), Walter Hill – The stunt casting of real life brothers is cool. But the film never really immerses you in the world of the old west. Sets and costuming feel really thin and there’s no real weight to anything that happens. Feels like it skips over a lot of the plot, almost skim-reading. Dennis Quaid is unrecognisably young and quite good, whilst Randy Quaid proves that he was never a good actor. A shaggy dog of a film. Wastes a really good Ry Cooder score too.

Waterworld (1995), Kevin Costner – The first 20 mins or so of this are maybe 90% tops and 10% wild, wild missteps. But by the end that has basically reversed, descending into an inexplicable mess of references and actions that make no sense in the world of the film. Prospects of being a ‘good-bad’ film are hampered by Costner’s character being a misogynist asshole and his emotional arc is dumbfounding. Women are just treated awfully throughout. Which I’m sure they would be in a dystopia, but I don’t think that’s what the film is aiming for. It looks bloody beautiful though, can see why it was so prohibitively expensive. Also I wanted more giant sea monster. So much more.

A Private Collection (1973), Walerian Borowczyk – Quite literally a tour of ol mate’s smut collection. Gross. Male gazey puppets through to him just rotating old nudey paintings on an easel. Dude gives off a pretty creepy vibe. Though not sure how to avoid that when you just standing there talking about your porno collection whilst hiding your face. Vaguely illuminating about the depiction of sexuality through the ages. Too creepy though.

Psychohydrography (2010), Peter Bo Rappmund – Shows promise early, but interminable. The use of photos feels contrived here and lacks the ‘animation’ of other films that have used the same technique. Doesn’t tell a coherent story about water flow (or anything else). Though there is the occasional cool piece of haunting, unique imagery. A real battle to get through.

Equity (2016), Meera Menon – Cool to see a financial crisis story told through the female lens. But it struggles to ever look and feel like anything more than an average TV show. Clunky script never manages to integrate the story strands. And the writing is not strong enough to pull off the shocking big picture intrigue stuff.

Get Out (2017), the most hyped horror release of the year, emanates from an unlikely source – Jordan Peele of Key and Peele sketch comedy fame. On the basis of this first directorial effort, even though he initially seemed like an unlikely horror maestro, let’s hope he has a bunch more ideas stashed away because I want to see them all.

Peele has talked of being a horror fan and you can see the affection for the genre early on. A bunch of clever allusions to classic horror plant the seeds beautifully for what is to come – the unfriendliness of suburbia, a boarded up basement, psychologists with ominous skills. The film also uses (very clever) jump scares early on to put the viewer firmly on edge. This is very effective because even the ‘straight’ plot that unfurls early still just feels a little off. Adding in these sharp moments of terror only emphasises that feeling. But for all this riffing, the romantic weekend away to meet your girlfriend’s parents feels like a unique setup. Especially given how genuine the relationship between the two leads feels. And the traditional family history aspect to the film’s setup is given a wrinkle when a family anecdote about a beloved grandfather being beaten by an African American sprinter is recalled. The nature of the threat in the film evolves and escalates from a feeling of not being quite welcome, to more overt forms of mental and physical control.

Someone on my facebook posted that they were now scared of white people after watching Get Out. After my initial shock that this person was only now becoming scared of white people, I began to feel that it was a pretty decent distillation of the movie’s thematic concerns. Or concern, because racism (though different dimensions of it) is really the full focus of what is taking place, and there is a whole lot to break down on that level. Peele examines racism in the film in both subtle and more obvious ways. Which is not to say the latter are bad in any way. One of the film’s best sequences is where the film quite directly invokes notions of African Americans being property and the way that racist mindset classically manifested itself. Even just from an optics point of view, the film abounds in scenes of many white people in the frame with a single African American person. In addition, the intersection of class with racism is a focus as the film takes place in a very upper class environment. Here Peele skewers the notion of reverse racism with the most privileged lamenting some perceived physical or societal advantage being held by people of colour generally. The film never stops to make any of these points, nor does Peele needlessly draw attention to them. They are not hidden away but are organic to the story, and frankly organic enough to contemporary society that they never jar.

So much of what Get Out does well is as a result of the script, which juggles a lot of different elements very well. The racial themes are incorporated into and reflected by the plot. And it also brings to life both very grounded and quite supernatural forms of horror, without either jarring. Unsurprisingly the film uses humour well, with some very funny moments lightening the mood but never undermining it or the very real horrors of the film. There’s lots of humour but the film is in no way a comedy. Peele is adept enough behind the camera to scare the viewer in different ways – slow creepiness and visceral fast jump scares accompanied by a burst of noise. Both of these scared the shit out of me at different times, usually accompanied by the incredible atmosphere of the score, which is adept at accentuating the two very different types of horror. The performances across the board are excellent, especially from the leads Daniel Kaluuya and Alison Williams, as well as LilRel Howery as a comedy relief TSA agent. In addition to those, Catherin Keener and Bradley Whitford pull off tricky, key supporting roles as Williams’ Rose’s parents really well.

Verdict: This is an incredible film. A thematically rich riff on classic horror from a voice that feels totally new. It’s also fuckin terrifying, always a good selling point for a horror flick. It’s also one of the first screenings I attended where there was a genuine spontaneous outburst of applause during the film, which was very well earned. Longneck of Melbourne Bitter

These just keep getting later and later. February was a veeery up and down month for me. I’m a pretty happy dude, so it’s not often I see 12 films I don’t like. But there was also plenty of stuff that I really dug too, and a really diverse range of cool films too. So hopefully something in here everyone will like.

Worth Watching

Whip It (2009), Drew Barrymore – What a great female ensemble. There are about 10 performances here I love. This film totally kicks ass too, I love it. A nice reimagining of the coming of age story, set in the world of roller derby. So charming. There’s a beautifully drawn romance on top of everything else and Ellen Page has perhaps never been better. So fucking fun and life affirming.

Masterminds (2016), Jared Hess – Driven by a very funny, focused comedy script. Sticks nicely to the trashy late 90s conceit. Kirsten Wiig is quickly becoming one of my favourite actors. Really well performed by everyone. Kate McKinnon is a delight, though underused. I didn’t even find Galifinakis too painful which is weird. Dig how different the performances are, but they don’t jar when put together. A very fun way to interpret real-life events on screen.

Fences (2016), Denzel Washington – Quite brilliant. Anchored by three very good performances. Early it feels a little too much like a play, as it is based on. But the central character played by Washington is such a complex one it takes hold. Feels like a deep, specific portrayal of the African American experience. We don’t directly see this play out, just the result. The result is not pretty, likeable or sympathetic. But it’s a product of these roots. The film never gives you an easy read on the character and the entire film swirls around this one deeply flawed individual. A tough watch.

The Princess and the Frog (2009), Ron Clements & John Musker – A great retelling of a fairy tale, with some nice inverting of traditional Disney princess tropes. A city with a racial divide. Helps there to be a much stronger send of (real) place than is the norm. Feels immersed in New Orleans, with the food, locations and cool songs. Brilliantly repositions Prince Charming to also be the animal sidekick. One of the funnier Disney films. Also has the wonderfully realised camaraderie and joyful supporting characters of the studio’s best. Thankfully never becomes pastiche.

The Book of Mary (1985), Anne-Marie Mieville – A really clever short film about divorce, but from a kid’s perspective. Different images cut together in a thought provoking way. Smart script that articulates a break-up conversation with realism. A focus on how the kid handles this, acting out like an adult. Also examines how the adults choose to relate to her.

Pete’s Dragon (2016), David Lowery – A simple film, though at times bold in its choices and bloody beautiful. I love that there is never any doubt that the dragon actually exists. Cool for a family film to feel so deeply rooted in mythos. The CGI creature is integrated into the forest visuals seamlessly. Great exposure for kids to themes of environmentalism, deforestation, land use and ownership of animals. Occasionally there’s some dreary sentimentality and shallowness to the examination of human greed. But overall it’s a cracker.

Medea (1969), Pier Paolo Pasolini – A funny script with wry performances help to make the labyrinthine, bemusing mythology not a deal breaker. Actually it’s almost a little charming in the end. Great location and imagery like so many of Pasolini’s films. Long stretches of silent, intriguing images as worldbuilding. Stark, lean brutality that sits alongside some almost gaudy costuming. A strange concoction that works somehow. Much of it is the joy in watching how the characters interact with the space. Didn’t really know what was going on a lot of the time. Still really dug it.

Green Street Hooligans (2005), Lexi Alexander – There are elements here that don’t work – how the Elijiah Wood character enters the scene, contrived tiffs in the group, the family dramas and an annoying voiceover. But the positives outweigh those. Particularly the action which is shot with a great, controlled kineticism. The film is at its best when really steeped in football culture. Charlie Hunnam is really good, has a great presence.

Detective Dee: Mystery of the Phantom Flame (2010), Hark Tsui – It takes you a little while to adjust to the visual stylings. A comic book vibe. Deeply entrenched style to the film, even in just the way people move. It’s a world of a female empress and magic deer. Radness basically, with a nice note of schlock. Unique fight sequences. Almost a little silly, but at the same time engaging and a weight to them. The performances are all really good. The story is a red herring laced reimagining of the traditional detective narrative structure.

Young Detective Dee: Rise of the Sea Dragon (2013), Hark Tsui – There’s a really well realised brash cockiness to the way Dee is written here. There is perhaps not enough grounding in story before leaping into the action. Perhaps even more stylised visually than the first. It’s great fun, with a real spark to the performances. More of a sherlocky vibe than the first one – Dee has an unmatched genius and there’s even a Watson type character. Plus there’s the sea monster is awesomely (and originally) designed.

Elegy to the Visitor from the Revolution (2011), Lav Diaz – Probably a good idea for my first exposure to Diaz to be one of his shorter efforts. Endlessly interesting, though even at this length not all that easy to make it through. Use of movement within a static frame is challenging and beautiful. No doubt I missed aspects of this due to my lack of knowledge of Filipino history/politics/culture. Strange conceit – an ethereal figure from the revolution occasionally, but not always, observes events. Haunting at times. Weaving of dreams and reality. The camera lingering on her face as she perhaps comprehends the revolution led to the disappointing modern Phillipines.

The Ninth Configuration (1980), William Peter Blatty – Delightfully strange. Takes place in an asylum for Vietnam vets housed in an old castle. Heavy influence of dreams. Lots of off-screen voices giving them a disembodied vibe. Stacey Keach is really good. The mix of serious and silly grates for a fair while but grows on you. The nonsense of the patients is actually very well written. Darkly funny, with mania seeping out of the corners of this castle. A slog at times that really comes together. Very much a statement of the impact of the war on soldiers.

Rams (2015), Grimur Hakonarson – Almost wordless, at least between the humans. Focuses on men with a strong connection to their flocks and the results when that is threatened. As expected with an Icelandic film, every bit of scenery is breathtaking. At times funny in a very wry, dark way with even a hint of absurdism. A very different set of stakes that we are used too as well, just a pack of sheep. But here they are of life and death importance to the characters. Very well acted and quite emotionally challenging. A rather strange mix of pathos, drama and comedy.

Not Worth Watching

War Dogs (2016), Todd Phillips – I got basically nothing out of this, even though Jonah Hill has really turned into quite the actor. I usually like Teller too, but he’s an empty presence here. The script is kinda crass but too dry to be a rollicking adventure comedy. Also doesn’t really saying anything. Just exists in an average middle ground. Flat. You know where it’s going all along and it’s not fun or exciting getting there.

Hail Mary (1985), Jean-Luc Godard – Too obtuse. Toying with the allegory and relationship between scientific logic and religion. Choppy and too vigenetty. In spite of, or perhaps because of, the constant biblical references, this feels like a painstakingly crafted piece of meaninglessness. Worthless really and the totally overt correlations by the end are just silly.

The Wave (2015), Roar Uthaug – Disappointing. The start is promising, with the monitoring of the lake for any signs of seismic activity grounded nicely in science, including invoking a real life event from the early 1900s. Also some cool/terrifying imagery of them checking monitoring equipment literally inside the mountain. But the slow burn goes on too long and is too quiet. There’s not enough plot which impacts on the underdeveloped emotional leaps and the special effects are a little shoddy too. There’s some nice enough stuff in there but pretty underwhelming overall. Also struggle with these film that depict such wanton destruction.

Central Intelligence (2016), Rawson Marshall Thurber – Anyone, even The Rock, in a fat suit is a bad way to start. And whilst there are some better moments, this is not consistently funny, or engaging on the action front. The Rock’s charisma gets the film so far, but he struggles with the silliness. Just feels too sluggish and it’s a little cringy how little edge there is to the humour.

A Hologram for the King (2016), Tom Tykwer – Feels like an old-fashioned ‘cultural clash’ comedy. Clunky, almost crass at times. There’s some interesting supporting characters and the love story elements are nice. As is the kind of otherworldly feel to it all. But I found it to be pretty standard white dude at a middle age crossroads type of fare.

Jackie (2016), Pablo Larrain – A hard one for me. I think structurally it’s disconcertingly put together with the non-linear approach. The journo framing device is hacky too and the script overall delivers little. Portman is undeniably powerful, but the performance is often distractingly full of affectation. Though the boldarse score is a chance that really pays off. Peter Sarsgaard gives the film’s best performance as an incredibly Bobby Kennedy. And as if John Hurt’s death was not crushing enough, he is masterful and complex here. It’s a tough sit. Constantly on a knife’s edge of an explosion of unfathomable grief that never comes.

Heathers (1988), Michael Lehmann – Another where I loved a lot of aspects of it, but it doesn’t work as a whole. The design is ace. Really interesting sound design and the colour pops. Winona Ryder is utterly excellent too. Feels like she is conveying more than everyone else onscreen. Very much a teen film, with something slightly off, as conveyed through the style. But there’s a Burton style eccentricity here that does not work. And Christian Slater gives a very strange performance as a dreary, hateable character that drags the whole film down. A really gross, totally manipulative dude.

Tamara Drewe (2010), Stephen Frears – A bummer given how good the graphic novel it’s based on is. Starts off fun with some good insight into the writing process. And even works as a very sad portrait on the state of a marriage. But then it starts to take itself too seriously. Also can’t make the teenager or love triangle elements of the story work as well as the novel. Really tapers off. Feels like there’s no insight beneath the soapy goings on.

Victor Frankenstein (2015), Paul McGuigan – The Max Landis script is the main issue with this film. Shocker. We are never transported to the time and place of the film. The plot is just tepid and it feels as though there is very little reimagining of Shelley’s novel, with minimal escalation to the events. The atheist riflings that go outside serving the themes of the film are tiresome too. As for the performances, McAvoy has his moments, whilst Daniel Radcliffe is fine though playing a very muddled character.

Sausage Party (2016), Greg Tiernan & Conrad Vernon – Fucking awful. A painfully obvious, desperately dull religious satire. Most of the jokes just feel like the crassest thought possible rather than containing any wit. It all feels pretty clumsy. Though there is no denying chewing gum Stephen Hawking is pretty funny.

The Great Wall (2016), Yimou Zhang – Starts super strong – rollicking awe-inspiring adventure with a bold monster storyline and spectacular visuals. The early extended battle sequence had me giddy with excitement. But it’s all downhill from there. The film slows, I guess in order to tell some story. But it just bores. And Damon’s character gets a little white savioury. A shame that the early promise just totally fizzles out.

Mad Money (2008), Callie Khouri – Very grounded in the financial crisis. Asks us to care what happens to this rich white woman which is pretty grating. Most interesting on the occasions that it examines the structural elements that impact on Queen Latifah’s character. She is really good, as is Katy Holmes who is really underused. Keaton plays it a little silly and having her as the brains of the operation annoys. As a heist flick it’s lifeless. A bummer, as you could do something interesting with these performers and even these characters.

An extremely gruesome female directed feminist cannibal film is a unique sell. So perhaps it is unsurprising that Julia Ducournau’s Raw (2016) amassed a huge amount of festival hype over the past year. Even filtering out the usual bullshit about how many people fainted at each screening, this is a film that impressed and excited film fans, both horror fiends and otherwise. Festival hype can derail many a film and this seems particularly true of those in the horror genre. Thankfully though, Raw is as unique as it sounds on paper, meaning it is next to impossible for smug fans to dismiss it as something we’ve seen before. Whilst the film is notably gross and visceral, the overriding sense of the experience is deeply disquieting. The way a horse is manoeuvred whilst under sedation is as disturbing as anything far more gruesome that takes place.

Justine, a committed vegetarian, leaves home to attend vet school. There she undergoes a series of hazing rituals that culminate in her being forced (under pressure from her older sister who underwent the same rituals) to eat a rabbit’s kidney. Even before this moment the raucous college environment is confronting and unsettling. The sound design is oppressively loud and there is an inescapable intensity to the place that you desperately want to escape. Following the forced feeding, Justine develops a very gnarly rash which is the first step in a slide that will eventually lead to cannibalism. Ducournau builds this slide steadily as Justine makes small though increasingly disturbing decisions. But perhaps the two grossest, in your face pieces of body horror in the film actually precede the cannibalism. Firstly as the doctor peels away swathes of skin to assess Justine’s rash, and secondly as she brings back up huge amounts of her own hair she has been swallowing to satiate her forbidden desires.

Thankfully the thematic interest of the film goes a lot deeper than these forbidden desires being a cipher for pre-marital sex or some such trite rubbish. This is not to say consideration of taboos and the consequences of breaking them is not a very real interest that the film has. It is just that this is a really thematically dense film that does not settle for that. There is a heavy focus on sisterhood, both literal (her relationship with her sister who is attending the same vet school) and figurative (feminist empowerment). Justine does burst through the bonds that both herself and others have placed upon her through her life. And her actual sister plays a role in that. There is a sense of empowerment as she comes into her own. Much of that plays out in how she fights her sister, but also how together they fight a world that wants to dictate how they should act and what they should be. This is particularly stark as it all occurs in a vet school where the heavily ingrained misogynist culture is so well established at the beginning of the film.

One of the great achievements of Ducournau’s film is just how watchable it remains, despite the graphic flesh eating and faint-inducing hype. There is a character focus that helps with that. We never lose Justine as a young woman, finding her way in a frightening new environment that many of us have experienced, beneath the gore and chomping. The character is brought to life excellently by Garance Marillier, initially conveying the dual naïveté and drive of an ambitious uni student. Then later she is also great at conveying discomfort, embodying physical agitation in a way that is hard to watch. The film is shot beautifully, pulling your eyes into certain parts of the frame where the director wants to focus your attention. The characters move through this space at times like dancers. Early that’s ethereal, adding a strange dimension to that unsettling vibe, later it’s harsh and aggressive. The soundtrack, often coming in abrasive bursts, is noticeable from the start. It’s melodic, with the tiniest hint of malice always running underneath. The moment where Justine first tastes human flesh provides the best single piece of scoring in years, perfectly amplifying the exultant and triumphant feeling of that moment.

Verdict: Feminist, gross, dense, disquieting and still really watchable, Raw really does feel like something unique in a genre where it is so rare to say that. Even though I almost feel like I need a second viewing to properly process it all, I wholeheartedly recommend it on this first experience. Pint of Kilkenny

There are various levels to the filmography of Alfred Hitchcock. The all-time classics everyone has heard of. The Hollywood stylistic experiments. His early formative British and silent work. But perhaps the most enjoyable of these groups to discover as a film buff are the ones not all that many speak about, but that are equally as brilliant to that first group. In my experience they are his best, most pure in genre terms thrillers. Shadow of a Doubt (1943) is one, and happens to be my favourite of his films. And now to that I would add Strangers on a Train (1951), which if it doesn’t quite match that film for me, it manages to pack maybe the best character and best sequence of the director’s career into one film.

Perhaps equalled only by Psycho (1960) in Hitchcock’s oeuvre, this is a quite nasty film. There’s some fuckin menace bubbling along just below the surface. In perhaps the most brilliant sequence of his career, a tense and totally brutal murder takes place at a carnival. This follows a chase with all of Hitch’s hallmarks. The shadows and sounds of the tunnel of love as well as the bluster and bravado of the murderer on a test of strength, just feel so distinctly him. If it sounds utterly all over the shop and out there, it is. I’m not sure any other director could have made it work. The plot carries on, the characters swirling around one another. Hitchcock shows us he is able to elicit incredible tension, just through the length of a tennis match. The events come to a head back at the carnival from earlier in the film. This whole end sequence, sort of sums up his reputation for me. A wildly fun and crowd pleasing denouement to a perfectly, artistically constructed tense thriller. Without giving anything away, it mainly goes down on a carousel, a structure of fun taking on malevolent overtones in a stark way.

Strangers on a Train stands as a monument to Hitchcock’s brilliance as a storyteller. From the very start where our ‘strangers’ are identified only by their feet, the film almost overflows with creativity. But in a highly controlled manner, as Hitch is able to harness his highly original approach in a way that serves story above all else. There is something chilling about the psychological edges of the characters in the film, most notably Bruno. So much of the character comes from the great performance by Robert Walker. Something off with him from the get-go, his unsettling obsession with “people who do things”. The witty and quite modern script, the way Bruno helps a blind man cross the road, gives him psychopathic tendencies that feel both real and harrowing. The plotting of the film hangs off this character too, based around how each character will react to his manipulation. Just as the first trip to the carnival is maybe Hitchcock’s best sequence, Bruno is maybe his best character. Also excellent is Farley Granger, playing the charming tennis player Guy well out of his depth. He almost functions as a measure of normality to consider Walker’s Bruno against.

Verdict: Strangers on a Train is a legit classic Hollywood thriller and sees Hitchcock at the absolute peak of his creative powers. Anchored by a couple of very good performances, the plot gets you so invested in events it will leave you wanting to yell at the screen (or in my case, actually yelling at the screen). Longneck of Melbourne Bitter

Progress: 146/1001

Related beermovie.net articles for you to check out: Sabotage and Rope.

Like what you read? Then please like Beermovie.net on facebook here and follow me on twitter @beer_movie